Legal AF by MeidasTouch - Trump OUT OF CONTROL Maniac, CRASHES and BURNS in Courts

Episode Date: November 5, 2023

Ben Meiselas and Michael Popok are back with a new episode of the weekend edition of the LegalAF podcast. On this episode, they discuss: the NY Civil Fraud case against Trump and Trump World, including the lack of any real defense raised by the testimony of Eric or Don Jr., and the Court imposing a gag order on the Trump lawyers bashing his law clerk; developments in the DC Election Interference case as Trump tries to delay the March 2024 trial, including an appeals court temporarily staying the gag order Judge Chutkan imposed on Trump at least until the end of the month as the Judge decides whether to dismiss the case based on immunity grounds; the Mar a Lago criminal trial, as Judge Cannon fumbles around and creates her own grounds to delay the trial; the likely outcome of the various state court proceedings attempting to determine if Trump should be kept off the ballot, and so much more from the intersection of law, politics and justice. DEALS FROM OUR SPONSOR! FUM: Head to https://TryFum.com/legalaf and use code LEGALAF to save 10% off when you get the journey pack today! RHONE: Head to https://rhone.com/legalaf and use code LEGALAF to save 20% off your entire order! SUPPORT THE SHOW: Shop NEW LEGAL AF Merch at: https://store.meidastouch.com Join us on Patreon: https://patreon.com/meidastouch Remember to subscribe to ALL the MeidasTouch Network Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/meidastouch-podcast Legal AF: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/legal-af The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-politicsgirl-podcast The Influence Continuum: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-influence-continuum-with-dr-steven-hassan Mea Culpa with Michael Cohen: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/mea-culpa-with-michael-cohen The Weekend Show: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-weekend-show Burn the Boats: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/burn-the-boats Majority 54: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/majority-54 Political Beatdown: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/political-beatdown Lights On with Jessica Denson: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/lights-on-with-jessica-denson On Democracy with FP Wellman: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/on-democracy-with-fpwellman Uncovered: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/maga-uncovered Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Slay the holidays with Real Canadian Superstores PC Holiday Insiders report. Serve Appies under $16, like PC, Pellenta Fries, PC, Cranberry, Breebastery bites, and PC, Eggplant, Parmesan, Espoir, Le Attelle, only at your Super Holiday Store. This NBA season make every three-pointer Alley Up and Buzzer Beat are even more exciting with FanDuel. Download the app today to see why we're North America's number one sports book. Nineteen plus in physically located in Ontario. Gamlin Tom call 18665-212-600 or visit connectcentario.ca. Metro links and cross links are reminding everyone to be careful, as Eglinton Cross-Town

LRT train testing is in progress. Please be alert, as trains can pass at any time on the tracks. Remember to follow all traffic signals, be careful along our tracks, and only make left turns where it's safe to do so. Be alert, be aware, and stay safe. What's behind a life electrified? What's lighting up our communities? Powering more carbon-free commutes? And boosting homegrown innovations? It's electricity generated right here at home.

From a newable hydro to nuclear, our lowest carbon energy source. Ontario Power Generation is shaping the clean energy future by investing in Ontario and electrifying life every day. See how at opg.com. Rinse and repeat, rinse and repeat, if you guess that this is what Don Jr. said during his testimony at the New York Attorney General Civil Fraud Trial this week when asked about signing off on the accuracy of fraudulent financial statements for the years 2017 through 2020 while claiming to never have reviewed them.

Ding ding ding, you would be correct, Don Jr. and Eric Trump gave devastating testimony, not only for the civil case that they are presently in, but at times in Pope Ock, I want to get your take on this later in the show. It seemed that they were opening up the door for criminal charges against them more criminal charges against their

father. We will talk about that and more and also Donald Trump and Ivanka are up next week after Ivanka's emergency stay request was denied where she cited that it was a school week. So if the law is on your side and the facts are on your side, what do you do if you are a massive fraudulent enterprise called the Trump organization? Well, you have your lawyers attack the judges, law clerk, Yep. Judge In Gore on the judge presiding over this

mess right now had to impose the same gag order that was imposed on Donald Trump on Donald Trump's lawyers because they couldn't control their own obsessive attacks on the judges, Law Clerk. You heard that right folks, a gag order on the lawyers. You know what they say, Don Jr. Rinssen repeat, Rinssen repeat. Next we go to Washington, DC in the federal criminal prosecution of Donald Trump there for trying to overthrow the results of the 2020 election where things are getting real. How real? Well, judge Tanya Chutkin just made an order on the jury selection procedures with jury questionnaires to be sent out fairly soon. Judge Chutkin also rejected

Trump's lawyers' ridiculous request to access classified information in that case. And Donald Trump is seeking to delay. You guessed it, delay, delay, delay the deadlines in that case and try to stay that case. But Judge Chutkin is keeping things moving. She's keeping this case on the train tracks headed to a March 2024 trial date. Meanwhile, Donald Trump is filing and had filed.

Emergency stays basically everywhere he filed an emergency state to the DC Circuit Court of Appeals regarding the gag order that was imposed on him. He just needs to threaten people right away. The DC Circuit Court of Appeals made up of two Obama judges, one Biden judge, actually granted a very short administrative state expedited the appeal I want to break that down and I also want to talk about something where I

actually strongly disagree with Jack Smith on a move that he made regarding the access of the media to the trial in March and we'll talk about the different briefs filed by Jack Smith and Trump regarding media access. It's made come as a surprise to you with Jack Smith there came as a surprise to me. Rinsen repeat, rinse and repeat. Whereas Judge Chutkin is moving the case along in DC expeditiously. Judge Eileen Cannon continues to delay things in Florida in the federal criminal case. There regarding Trump's willful retention of national defense information.

Judge Cannon held a hearing this week on Trump's request to delay the trial after Judge Cannon previously stayed and delayed the other hearing dates after previously staying and delaying those hearing dates. Cannon did not make a ruling, but issued a minute order, if you guessed it, yes, staying the hearing dates and deadlines until sometime in the future where she decides to grace us all with something that a judge is supposed to do, which is to actually make a freaking order. Judge Kenan also made a ruling, though, where she substituted her own feelings about what the classified information

procedures act says over what the actual law says will break that down. And finally, a week of major news in the Constitutional disqualification cases of Donald Trump under the 14th Amendment Section 3, we wrapped up the first week of a trial in Colorado on the issue of disqualification. Donald Trump filed a lawsuit to block his disqualification in Michigan and the Minnesota Supreme Court heard oral arguments on the disqualification case there. So in other words, a pretty quiet week in the law. I'm just joking. I've been my cell is joined by Michael Popak busy as can be here on legal AF. All these court cases are keeping us busy

keeping the judiciary busy the court of appeals busy. But ultimately if I could extrapolate one common theme thus far though folks the good news is the wheels of justice are turning in the right direction. It doesn't mean it always keeps going in that direction, but generally that's where the arc has been going. We've been following it each and every step of the way. Michael Pope, how about that intro, sir? Yeah, it's a great intro.

What we're watching is judges struggling to get Donald Trump under control. We're watching it in various court houses around the country. Sometimes it leads to immediate appellate involvement at the appeal level, sometimes it doesn't. But in the same week, almost the same day, we see multiple judges trying to get Donald Trump to participate appropriately in the criminal justice system and not use extra judicial meaning outside in the street, carnival-like,

violent rhetoric to undermine the judicial process. So you've got a judge in the federal court in a civil case who ruled yesterday, almost the exact same time that Donald Trump's lawyers were being gagged again, that there would be an anonymous jury because Donald Trump is prone to violent rhetoric and attacking them and they need protection. At the same time, at the same week,

that another federal judge reimposed her gag while an appellate court is struggling with whether that gag federal judge reimposed her gag while an appellate court is struggling with whether that gag should be reimposed at all. But all we're watching, whether it's Judge Chutkin, Judge Kaplan up in New York, Judge McAfee who already decided to have an anonymous jury for their protection when Donald Trump is on the, you know, is, is being tried in the others and these gag orders is a justice system, state and federal struggling to control and out of control, Donald Trump. It's such a great point that you make.

It's like the systems that we have in place that were the envy of the world. They modeled systems in democracies. That is, after our system, how are you able here in the United States? The pro-democracy loving international community would always want to ask and learn to rely on these norms, rely on traditions, rely on precedent. One of the things that you think about

as a young lost dude and two, which is so interesting is so everyone, this tapestry that is the American jurisprudence is actually held together by the kind of full faith and credit just of the system, of the belief that it works. And it could be ripped apart. By people who undermine it, and it's such a great point that you make. And so you see when this system that has worked, you know, set definitely not perfectly, but has been the envy of the world when that kind of comes into touch with Donald Trump, somebody

who attacks NATO, someone who praises Vladimir Putin. It would be the equivalent of if you brought like a Putin into this system. How would they react? If you brought a Viktor Orman or a Kim Jong-un style, Malignant Narcissist, sociopathic authoritative, they would behave the same way. And that should be so inathema to our great constitutional system here that's built upon rules and order and professionalism. And then you even see Pope Akin, we should just get into it right away. I'll toss to you on this New York Attorney General Civil Broadcast with the gag order

being imposed on Donald Trump's lawyers, even people like, you know, like a Christopher Kice, for example, somebody who prior to this actually had a good reputation. It was a solicitor general in Florida, known as being a respected lawyer, even if it made you upset or whatever that he was representing Donald Trump, I used to say here, look, he's known as being a good lawyer.

But when you watch someone like Christopher Keiss play with pigs in the mud and then himself just get dirty and gross, like he spends his days right now attacking the judges' law clerk. And he says he's getting angry that the judges' law clerk is passing notes to the judge's law clerk and he says he's getting angry that the judge's law clerk is passing notes to the judge, which by the way is her job to help inform the judge and that's what he talks about and he goes there, we have two adversaries, they're obsessed with the law clerk and as Judge and Goran said to Kais, like this sounds misogynistic and just weird, like what are you doing in Goran had an issue in order?

Maybe we start with that Popeye because as a lawyer watching just the behavior of those lawyers, that's out of control. And I have a unique perspective too because I practice in Florida where Chris Kais practices and I practice in New York for 32 years. I'm embarrassed for Chris Kais. I really am. Florida, where Chris Geist practices, and I practice in New York for 32 years. I'm embarrassed for Chris Geist. I really am. And I think he's very close, as I said on a recent hot tick to having his license, his permission slip to practice in New York on this case pulled by the judge

because he is practicing law in New York on a permission slip. It's called a pro-Hawk VJ admission. We all do it. And I'm pro-Hawk VJ and numerous jurisdictions at right at this moment around the country But that is a that is a license that is a permission slip that is granted by that court and It it assumes that you will know and understand and learn the rules of the of the court the chamber the court house The appellate rules as if you were a New York lawyer, and to watch Chris Kaice and Alina Hava, them out letting her off the hook, even

Cliff Roberts, the other lawyer that's there, is an embarrassment. I thought I was watching a long-law sequel to my cousin Vinnie, where the judge has to teach the lawyer the fundamentals of the courtroom. Let me break it down, Chris, and I've done this for him in a hot take about the difference between Florida practice where he's applied his trade and Florida pellet practice and a The Ruff and Tumble world of the New York Supreme Court, where I regularly practice.

There's a big difference and Chris doesn't want to acknowledge it because it's not to his benefit to acknowledge it So instead as I said he comes in like some sort of my cousin Vinnie like oh you you were serious about that Yeah, we're serious about that in Florida. There is no law There is no equivalent to the principal law clerk in New York the principal law clerk is an attorney The principal law clerk for judge andoron, for example, was a trial attorney, a trial lawyer, for the Corporation Council of New York, which is the city of New York's law department. I know about it. I've hired people from it. I have a current associate who's from

the Corp Council. They are very well trained, it's an elite group. She was a trial lawyer there. She's not just a clerk like just finished law school or is it her second year of law school. In Florida, there is no real clerk. Occasionally, a judge will get a clerk for the summer, but the person that is their administrator is the judicial assistant. We call them the J.A. The J.A. is really there to help you get in

to see the judge, submit papers to the judge, get a hearing with the judge, get a piece of paper to the judge, get an order out of the judge like that. That's the J.A. You know, I always talk my legal assistance to become friends with the J.A. Because they can make or break your life in terms of if they like you,

they get you on the docket if they don't, they don't. There's no equivalent for that. So I understand, but he now operates in New York. And the principal law clerk who's assisting a judge on a bench trial that's responsible for being the sole trial of fact is not only permitted to communicate with the judge frequently during the trial about things that she observes or he observes that assist the trial of fact, for instance. And if there was technology involved, if judging Goron was a computer person, she would be doing it with direct messaging or computers.

But because he's a little bit more old school, this principal locker physically passes him notes when she sits next to him. Totally appropriate, but it's just given Chris Kice a visual that he could latch onto. So here's examples of where I am sure the lock clerk is passing notes to the judge. There's now been over a dozen witness testimonies.

There's now been over thousands of pages of evidence, hundreds of exhibits. If she remembers that when Don Jr. is saying something that's completely inconsistent with a document that she's aware of, that's an evidence or a testimony from somebody else, like Don Bender, the mazer's accountant or something like that, I am sure she is writing Don, or something like that. I am sure she is writing Don Bender at Maysers said the following and handing it to the judge, or that's inconsistent with 2018 statement of financial condition and handing it to the judge, because he alone, not a computer, one man, one person has to make the decision after listening to five months of evidence. One of her jobs is to keep track of the evidence

and the narrative that's in the room and pass it along to the judge. So everything that she's doing is appropriate. And the fact that in her prior life, she may or may not have donated to democratic causes, and I'm not even sure that's true, is completely irrelevant to her ability to do her job as a trained attorney, member of a New York bar and a person who's taken an oath to be the principal law clerk for a judge.

And the fact that he cited, I know you just put something up on a take that I loved, he cited, he actually had the ball's Chris Keiss to cite bright part as the source of some evidence about the political donations of the law clerk, which is completely inappropriate. There were groans in the room when he cited bright part as his source that came from the audience like, like, headslaps, are you kidding me? And the judge and both the New York Attorney General that was handling the case that day. And the judge said, you think you got grounds for a,

to accuse me or disqualify me or something, bring it. Bring it. You have more than enough of things that you would like to bring up. Bring it. You know, it's a very New York moment, you know, like Robert's a Neuro-Attack-Sea Driver. Are you talking to me? Bring it. File the motion, Chris. But you're going to stop attacking our process, our system, our rules, and this particular

principal, Law Clerk, who happens to be a woman, and it's starting to look a lot like misogyny on your part. That's how the second gag order came out. And they can go take them up on appeal and use it as grounds. I'll go on an Olima Mega prediction. They are not gonna get judge and go on off this case through the first department

who's watching this case closely, all those judges, whoever's gonna be assigned to it, and don't like the way their law clerk, their system, or their judge are being disrespected on a daily basis as part of the strategy of Donald Trump. In terms of the testimony, I'll leave it on this. I'll turn it back to you. The fundamental problem with the brothers, Eric and Don Jr.

And I don't care what how old they were at any given moment. Sure, Eric Jr. was 26 during some of these issues. That's not my problem. Donald Trump put his crash test dummy sons and daughter in roles that they were not prepared for, didn't have any interest desire or skill to hold. And that already violates New York law.

New York Corporation law says, as most states, that people that are officers and directors have an obligation to perform their duties with care and with the care that a reasonable prudent person in a similar position, what exercise? So for them to keep saying, I just rely on all the accountants and the lawyers. Yes, there is a body of law that says

that if in exercising your reasonable care, you can rely on experts that give you information. But that doesn't work when the experts have already testified like Don Bender at Mazers that they relied on the information about appraisal value from the Trump organization, the arrow went the other way. So you can't say, well, I relied on on on Mazers. Mazers numbers. Well, Mazers said they relied on the Trump organization numbers and you signed all of these forms before they were sent into banks for lending. So the Don Jr. and Eric Defense, for me, actually proves the fraud.

Part of the fraud for me, and I'm sure for the judge, is that Donald Trump purposely put people that were ill-su suited, not prepared into these positions of control within his company, chief financial officer, whatever, Don Jr. was, whatever Eric was, whatever Ivanka was, he put them in their own purpose so that he had no controls for what Donald Trump wanted to do. Nobody would stop him to commit his fraud. And that's all we're watching. We're just watching the the feckless children

who were in inappropriately placed positions purposely by Donald Trump in order to execute his fraud. You know, the Rinssen repeat part of Don Jr.'s testimony referred to the fact when the New York Attorney General lawyer showed that for 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, all of the years were Don Jr. stated and the years before that, my junior, Don Jr. stated that he's never even seen the statement of financial conditions. He was signing his name and executing certifications that those statements of financial conditions were true

and accurate. So when Don Jr. laughed and said, oh, rinse and repeat, rinse and repeat, he was referring to like, let me give you some legal advice, Don Jr. It's too late because you already testified. So it's not like this could help you for those like, don't give Don Jr. legal advice. You don't say rinse and repeat in a case involving systemic and persistent fraud, where rinse and repeat refers to your scam

of rinsing and repeating the fraud over and over again. Like I don't know if it gets much more damaging than rinse and repeat. Rinse and repeat. I go to the next branch, rinse and repeat. You go to that branch, rinse and repeat. You know, and then Eric tried to basically pull the next branch, Rinssen repeat, you go to that branch, Rinssen repeat. And then Eric tried to basically pull the same thing, right? Eric said, yeah, I'm just the guy who pours the concrete here.

I don't get involved in statement of financial conditions. And then the New York Attorney General lawyer would show him the fact that he's on emails from Jeff McConey, the former controller or Patrick Bernie or this person or that person or that he was having communications with the lawyers and the tax appraisers and all these things and that he was involved in it. You know, and Eric would have to then say things, well, I don't really, I'm not the one who really gets involved in that. You know, I rely on the professionals and they tell me what to do.

But ultimately, you're the fiduciary, you're the leader, the buck stops with you and to all the mega-splainers out there who want to say, you don't know how it has been. This is how businessmen do it. It's not. It's really isn't. It's not how business people do things. Stop the mega-splaining. I've worked inside of a corporation larger than the Trump organization. I know what these different control officers are obligated to do. I might, the owner of my company and his children were all involved and everybody was involved with the statement of financial conditions. So, that's how business works in New York, having worked in business in New York. And there's no such thing as you give the task to a outside professional who you hire, and then you just close your eyes and you don't review it.

That's not a thing that successful business people or any business people do. And the course of my representation of a lot of successful business people and small business people, and people look over what their statements are before they sign something that could make them otherwise liable for the representations that they are making.

That was Eric's testimony, that was Don Jr's testimony. By the way, the one thing I want to mention too, the Trump organization is actually not an overly complex organization. When I asked Michael Cohen, he's like, maybe there's like 10 to 12 like executives, maybe. And yeah, sure, there are like a lot of, you know, employees and catering or this and that. But like in terms of like the core group, this is not like, let's say,

Kushman and Wakefield, which Eric Trump claimed that like he didn't even know what Kushman and Wakefield was. Like if you're in real estate, you know what Kushman and Wakefield is, which is actually a multinational corporation that actually brings in revenue of more than $10 billion a year. I think that's what their 2022 was. And Eris, a kushmin in Wakefield, what's this kushmin in Wakefield thing?

The kushmin in Wakefield actually has a lot of executives. The Trump organization doesn't. They all know each other. It's mostly run, you know, you know, by Donald Trump saying whatever he wants to do, the Trump organization doesn't. They all know each other. It's mostly run, you know, you know, you know, by Donald Trump saying whatever he wants to do, the complexity within the Trump organization is actually keeping the lives straight with all of the kind of fraudulent representations. It is the fraud is how do you play the refi game and how do you manipulate the assets in a way that tries to get around everything so

that you can avoid paying taxes, you can take out loans, and you can use the money you take out to try to buy more assets, and then basically run the same scam again, and then basically claim a premium because you claim that it's you. It's you're a bit, you know, part of the brand premium, which by the way was in there or there was a presidential premium, which is what a lot of people testified to as well, is that if he would take an asset for $10 million, he would then basically through the brute force similar to what he does to try to tell Americans that the election was stolen. Just think about his approach there.

He does that same game of lies with finance. And so he basically runs bully over the banks and over all of them too. And basically says to them, you know, look, this is all, you know, just like he goes, do you like should stolen same thing? This is a 200 million dollar asset right now. That's actually a 10 million dollar asset And by the way, he'd get away with it But for this fact that he then makes the conflicting representations to the different entities to gain different benefits And that's where he gets caught he'd get away with it if he just inflated high and then inflated high to everybody He'd actually get away with it even though it would still in my opinion be very problematic conduct Where he catches himself in his own fraud as he tells the the appraiser it's this the insurance company this and the taxing

And and the lender this one more point and I'll throw it back to you the moment where Chris Keiss We were the audible gasp and you heard it where Judge and Goron was just like, I'm absolutely issuing this gag order, is when they cited this like conspiracy riddled account called judicial protest. And this is an account that's actually been the subject of other federal court orders in other federal cases

that have basically stated that the statements made by this account are kind of erroneous and false and like the Breitbart article relied on like a right-wing radical account that has been adjudicated before that a federal court has made misrepresentation. So it's like, yeah, double triple layers of hearsay coming from like the kind of forchanish community. And that's what Christopher Kai says become so and go runs like gag order, but now imposed on you. You made your records, stop talking about my lot. What's your source of something called the 16 ninth amendment, some dirty, dirty address

on, on bright part? The thing that you raised during the midweek is also important. I want to re-raise it here, which is all of this testimony by Don Jr. and Eric doesn't solve for the equation or for the equation of defense, which is, were, why were the numbers cooked on the books related to the appraised value of properties emanating from the Trump organization? Who did it? Why was it done? And, and, and the like, they just said, wasn't me, piece of paper, point the butt past the buck, a lawyer, an accountant, I don't really know what that means, rinse and repeat. That doesn't answer the question that is at

the heart of the case. The books were cooked. Why were they cooked and who cooked them? They can keep fighting over, well, appraisal is such a, it's an art, it's not a science, there's no real number. So whatever I think, when I wake up in the morning, forget all that, the judge has already decided in his original summary judgment that that's not true, that there is something called a scientific approach to appraised value, and that properties have a value and they don't, they don't change in dramatic fashion over time, year over year, just because you want to try to move up in the Forbes 400 list of wealthiest people. And then as you said, Ben, and you demonstrate that you know you're participating in a fraud

because then you shrink the size of the asset, You deflate the asset when you want to get a tax break or an insurance break or the like. And so there's these two kids, these two adults, you know, once 46 years old, once 39 years old, you know, they don't have the answer to that question. They keep saying it was somebody else, but the problem is that somebody else is the Trump organization because the outside accountant mazers has said the numbers came from inside. It's like that old horror movie. The caller is in the house. The caller is in the house. It's like scream except financial version.

So we've got, we've got no witness so far who has taken the stand on behalf of the Trump Organization that you would think would be favorable to them, has solved for the problem of their defense. And that is a major problem at the rate they're going. As I said at the midweek, Angora has two thirds of his decision in order already written. He's just waiting for the next two months of testimony to come in. Yes, Ivanka will be fun. I want to see who they picked across the exam in Ivanka. And Donald Trump, of course, is going to be just show stopping in terms of how he performs on the stand and how they're ready to vivisect him, you know, in front of all the, in front of Judge Angora, but he is ready

to rule. It would be almost impossible for the judge having found on summary judgment that there was, but I'll call unintentional, persistent fraud to then after listening to the evidence so forward, far to not conclude that the other six counts of fraud haven't been satisfied by the New York Attorney General to allow him to do all of those remedies that are what you know you and I talk about as a perversed monopoly game where he's going to lose his buildings, his houses and his money because the Attorney General is going to get it for him. And the interesting thing that came out of recent reporting, and I did a hot tick on this,

is every time you and I talked about the complaint that she filed, that the New York Attorney General filed, we would always do like this little side voice, this soda Vote, a thing, where you would say, well, count one, and that's also a crime in the state of New York, and count two, that's also a crime, and count six, that's also a crime. And some people were York and count two. That's also a crime and count six. That's also a crime. And some people were saying, well, why isn't this a criminal case then? And now there is reporting that there had been serious discussions about not bringing this as a 63-12 case under the executive law of New York as a civil fraud case, but to

go to the governor and get the governor to give permission under 63-3 and let this be a criminal case for enterprise fraud, enterprise corruption or RICO, like a racketeering case brought by the New York attorney general, not by a local prosecutor against them. Apparently that got rejected. The reporting by one of the news media outlets was that Cuomo didn't want that to happen when he was governor. And so it spun off into these subparts. That's why the Manhattan DA went after the Trump Organization for tax evasion only and also stormy Daniels. And that's why there's a civil fraud case.

But it could have all been brought under the rubric of a criminal case to put Donald Trump in jail had somebody had the balls to do it. Two points I want to make. Number one, to that point, the Manhattan District Attorney's Office is still watching intently what is going on in this New York attorney general civil fraud case. So when Eric was being cross-examined and he was given the severance agreement that he says that he was involved in with Alan Weiselberg, which said that Alan Weiselberg would not be cooperative with adverse parties. And the New York attorney general lawyer said, so would you consider us to be an adverse party? And Eric walked right into it and said, yep, I would consider you to be an adverse party? And Eric walked right into it and said, yep, I would consider you to be an adverse party. Let me tell you what the correct answer was.

The correct answer would be that Alan Weisselberg would still be required to provide the lawful testimony anywhere we couldn't predict all of the potential at adverse parties if a lawyer was speaking with Eric Trump, but Eric Trump was really jolly right there to walk right into it and basically say, yep, that's what it is because they're trying to act like, New York attorney trying to be like his dad. New York attorney general,

Latisha James, this and that. So what the New York attorney general lawyer there was basically creating was a record where Eric can't invoke the fifth where that's gonna be turned over to the Manhattan District Attorney to evaluate and assess if that is obstruction of justice or obstructed or obstruction generally and if that is criminal and there are some other things that definitely the United District attorney is going to want. Number two, you mentioned a great point as well, Popeyes. And it really just comes down to evidence, evidence that the Trump organization sure are, is their defenses, not me, not me, this person, that person, but they're not disputing really the evidence that the books were cooked. They're just blaming each other for it. And so when we talk about the summary judgment order that was handed down by Judge Engoran, it was based on undisputed evidence because the Trumps didn't put evidence. Erick's not arguing on the stand. There wasn't

a direct exam where Erick's like, no, no, no, you've got this all wrong, New York AG. These values were accurate. Here's what we did. We brought in the appraiser. The appraiser told us this. And that's why we did it. We made sure that we were accurate. I do my due diligence on everything. That's what an innocent person would say.

No, we hired this company. I sat there with the professionals. We took 12, 15 meetings. I can't even remember how many hours we spent. We went through the spreadsheets and we were confident. This is the right number. So no New York attorney general, your experts wrong. We have our own experts because we went through this and I,

they don't do that at the Trump organ. Is that a lot of experts here? Exactly. And then, and then even when it comes to Ivanka's testimony, one of the things that in Goron pointed out is that Ivanka's lawyer never even submitted an affidavit with your moving papers, right? You don't you don't add a hearing say you know what maybe I'll get you on he goes it's too late for that and and and that's to me pop up I know for you, you know as lawyers these are the most basic procedural moves that you do that the Trump lawyers and the Trumps, they don't bring evidence.

They don't follow the rules. And then they go out there and Eric does the stupid accordion hands now too. And they do the dumb freaking accordion hands thing. And it's like, and I'm sitting there and I'm like, just follow the rules, just go through it, bring in the evidence. And by the way, if they brought in good evidence, I would be the first person here to talk about, hey, wow, that was a damaging day. Man, Eric, Eric was actually good. He brought in some spreadsheet. He did bring us some change.

Yeah. And he changed the numbers to make their daddy happy. And the thing that proves your point the best, and I know, we'll talk about this as part of the whole episode, is when, is what he did outside in front of the cameras. That's a whole different Eric Trump, but still said the exact same thing, which is they don't have any proof or evidence to defeat the fundamentals of the attorney general's case

about the fraud scheme that was used in the multiple components of the fraud scheme used by their father. Instead, all he's left with saying to the bank of cameras outside is, we repaid the money. We would never late with the payments on the money. This is a big tax pay or charade. Election interference election interference 2024 and walk away. That I mean, that's all he's got because his performance in the courtroom is is one of the things the judge is going to cite his testimony along with Don Jr. and in the future of Ivanka to support the fact that there was no credible counter evidence. The standard here, just to remind everybody, is not a criminal case standard. Latisha James's team does not have to prove their case of persistent

intentional fraud that's left in the six counts to get the remedies they're seeking. Beyond a reasonable doubt. In front, hopefully, one jur will have reason, will doubt forget that. This is a bench trial with a judge and the standard is preponderance of the evidence. Just ever so slightly more evidence on their side than on the other. Well, that's easy. There's no evidence on the other side. There's an occasional gacha moment with a cross examination question. You know, nine hours of done vendor the lawyer for mazers testifying, shitting all over the Trump organization. And Donald Trump particularly, they get like one cross examination. Just do you remember this email? There may be perjury.

You should get your own lawyer. I mean, put away all that bullshit, all that histrionics. I don't know, I'm cursing so much today must be the call the cold. It's the cold kind of stuff. I don't know. But there's other than that which gets over reported in the media, not on shows like cars, we were really diving into it, but in other shows, there's no pushback. There is nothing on the other side of the scale right now for the judge to consider. Now I know we're in the case in chief for the New York attorney general. We haven't yet turned. So we're waiting with baited breath. But we've seen many of their same witnesses already in the case in chief being called in as hostile witnesses. So it's not like they can change their testimony when they get over there. And there's not, it's obvious. It's obvious. To your point, There's not going to be evidence that they didn't cook the books. It's just going to have to come down to the judge believing

that Donald Trump can make up whatever number he wants it, whatever moment that he wants, but then what do you do about the deflation part, which is your point about trapping yourself in your own fraud? That's the problem. And that's where Donald Trump set the trap for himself and fell into his own trap. And fortunately, that's a kind of something that we refer to as maggot. It has that kind of, you know, idiocracy element. They push it because the greed is just cheap. They just push it that one extra level that fortune that fortunately exposes it all and we will keep exposing it all here on legal a f let's

compare what's going down in federal court in Washington DC the criminal prosecution there where judge tanya chuckkin is keeping trial on track for March 2024 while Judge Eileen Cannon is basically just destroying the drain tracks, just like Donald Trump did with infrastructure. We'll be right back after this quick break. This is Michael Popok, legal AF. Call Turkey may be great on sandwiches, but there's a better way to break your bad habits. We're not talking about some weird mind voodoo from your wacky neighbor or some sketchy message board. We're talking about our sponsor fume, and they look at the problem in a different way.

Not everything in a bad habit is wrong, so instead of a drastic, uncomfortable change, why not just remove the bad from your habit? Fume is an innovative, award-nominated device that does just that. Instead of electronics, fume is completely natural. Instead of vapor, fume uses flavored air. And instead of harmful chemicals, fume uses all natural, delicious flavors. You get it. Instead of bad fume is good. It's a habit you're free to enjoy and makes replacing your bad habit easy. Your fume comes with an adjustable air flow dial

and is designed with movable parts and magnets for fidgeting, giving your fingers a lot to do, which helps with de-stressing and managing anxiety while breaking your habit. The first time I used fume, I was shocked at how flavorful and fresh it tasted. It's easy to hold and perfectly balanced, quite honestly, extremely fun to fidget with.

The real wood material and sleek design definitely classes it up, and I feel pretty darn cool holding it. Stopping is something we all put off, because it's hard, but switching to Fume is easy, enjoyable, and even fun. Fume has served over 100,000 customers and has thousands of success stories, and there's no reason that can't be you. Join Fume in accelerating humanity's breakup from destructive habits by picking up the journey pack today. Head to TriFUME.com and use code legal AF to save 10% off when you get the journey pack today.

That's TRYFUME.com. Use code legal AF to save 10% off the journey pack today. This is Michael Popuck from Legal AF. If you like me, you understand the pains of choosing what to wear. Let's face it, most clothes are uncomfortable or too tight or are never actually the size you really are. Not to mention the annoyance of trying to put a good outfit together. And when you do have a good fit, you can only wear it for a few hours before you have an important meeting or dinner. And then you got to change all over again.

Everyone wants to dress the best and look good at all times because frankly it's a confidence booster. So here's the deal. Men's closets were due for a radical reinvention and Ron stepped up to the challenge. Ron's commuter collection is the most comfortable, breathable, and flexible set of products known to man. And here's why. Ron helps you get ready for any occasion with the commuter collection, which offers the world's most comfortable pants, dress shirts, one quarter zips and polos. You never have to worry about what to wear when you have the Rone commuter collection. Rone's comfortable for a way stretch fabric

provides breathability and flexibility that leaves you free to enjoy whatever life throws your way from your commute to work to your 18 holes of golf. It's time to feel confident without the hassle. With Rones Rakell release technology, Rakell's disappear as you stretch and wear the products, it's that easy. And with its gold fusion anti-odor technology, you'll be smelling fresh and clean all day long, and on top of that, Rones 100% machine washable, so you can ditch the dry cleaner altogether. I absolutely love Rome.

As you can see, this has truly become my go-to commuter fit and on the Legal AF podcast recordings. We're on the move a lot, whether it's jumping from meeting to meeting or catching a flight or an important dinner, the Rome commuter collection has never let me down. The versatility and comfort of the collection is undefeated. Even after I wear it all day, I still feel super fresh

because of that gold fusion anti-order technology. The Commuter Collection can get you through any workday and straight into whatever comes next. Head to rhone.com slash legal AF and use promo code legal AF to save 20% on your entire order. That's 20% on your entire order when you head to R-H-O-N-E slash legal a F, promo code legal a F. Find your corner office. Well, I love that odor-free stuff that Ron has to offer, the odor-free apparel,

because I don't like the stink of corruption in the Southern District of Florida. What's going down there with Judge Eileen Cannon? But I do like the smell of roses of accountability in Washington DC. You see that seamless transition there, Michael Popack. We're back. I'm Ben Myselas, joined by Michael Popack. Oh, and thanks to everybody who's been. We're back. I'm Ben Myseles, joined by Michael Popeye. Oh, and thanks

to everybody who's been getting those emojis. If you hit the dollar sign below on the YouTube chat, unlock the judge and go on emoji. It actually was unlocked earlier this week. Thanks for everybody who did that. And the YouTube memberships are different than Patreon.com slash might as touch, but they both go a very long way to help building this independent media platform. We have no outside investors yet. Thanks to this community, we are frequently one of the most watched shows on digital platforms

across the world. So thank you to the Legal AF community. We appreciate you. Let's talk about what's going on in Washington DC. It's like a lot of activity there this week. We've got Judge Tonya Chutkin sending, issuing an order. How about that Popeye, an actual order? That's a written order that's a paper order

unlike Judge Cannon's paperless orders that have massive impact without citing law. We'll talk about that. But Judge Chutkin's order on the jury questionnaire, which signals that she's moving this thing forward. You've got Donald Trump seeking an emergency stay with the DC Circuit Court of Appeals. He drew a panel with two Obama judges and one Biden appeal judge. They granted the administrative stay, which is kind of administrative, hence administrative

stay, and they made clear in that, don't read into this. This is not on the merits. This is the administrative process that the Court of Appeals just generally take. So if you can go into that. And then of course, we see Popeye also Trump trying to do everything he can to delay, delay, delay. He's filing a motion there to delay deadlines and then a motion to stay the entire case with Judge Chuck in which he's obviously going to reject saying that the presidential immunity motion to dismiss that he filed, which is totally

privilege, which is totally frivolous means that the entire case should stop. He doesn't want that March 2024 trial date. I'm going to toss it to you, Popeyes, but the one thing I do also want to mention, though, is you see that Trump's overall strategy here, though, he's going to try to bring all of these motions, like the dozens of things that he filed to the Supreme Court. And he's gonna hope that on an emergency basis, he either draws a panel on the DC Circuit or the Supreme Court where someone steps in and stays the trial even a few months.

That's his move with all of these moves. He knows Chutkin's gonna reject him, but his move is to push all of these to the appellate department. The appellate department. Yeah, we can talk a little bit about the difficulty of doing that. I did a hot take on the stay and just the lower temperatures here among our audience, what the appellate court did and it's a good draw for the Justice Department, not for Donald Trump.

But what they did is exactly what Judge Chuckkin did when she granted her administrative stay of her own of her own gag order after two weeks, she granted a stay of her own order to allow for full briefing to have it litigated in front of her before she made her ultimate decision to regag him. Same thing at the appellate court. It's not uncommon. We've seen it. We've talked about it,

even at the Supreme Court level, where one justice that's responsible for a circuit will stay administratively, and nothing is to be read into. In fact, they actually put the language in this particular order of stay, where we'll start with the stay issue on the gag order, giving him effectively another, whatever it is, 17 days, whatever it is, to create more examples that this appellate panel will take traditional notice of when it comes time for them to make their ultimate ruling and to reimpose the gag order. The reason I am confident that they're going to reimpose the gag order is one because judge Chutkin was right on the law as it relates to how you mitigate or how you synthesize the first amendment with the sixth amendment and how you just can't say anything if you're

a criminal defendant in the criminal system whose liberty is at the discretion of the judge an ill defendant in the criminal system whose liberty is at the discretion of the judge and her threatening of the needle was really appropriate given the case law and the precedent in DC. But more importantly, the standard of review, which I've talked about in prior hot text, you and I have talked about it at length over the last three years of legal AF, is really important here. And the standard of review favors the trial judge. The standard of review, appellate courts review decisions either with some level of deference to the trial court, no deference to the trial court, or different levels of burden

or hurdles that the party bringing the appeal has to satisfy. And under this one, it's the lowest level. It's abusive discretion. And the question is whether Judge Chutkin in evaluating all of the evidence, conducting her hearing, reading the case law, did she abuse her discretion in imposing this gag order? Yes or no? It doesn't start from scratch. It comes from a standard of abuse of discretion.

So that's what the appellate panel on the 20th of November with their oral argument, which we'll get an audio version of, because we'll be able to get it from the website for the court. You know the questions they're going to ask this John Loro, who's I'm guessing is going to argue at the appellate level for this, for John Donald Trump, which is, tell me, so I understand it. Tell me, give me an example of something that your client could say that we could gag because you're not going to take the position that nothing because he's a political candidate with core campaign, political first amendment speech. He

can say anything about anyone and anytime related to the criminal justice system. So show me your limits. What are they? Give me an example. And they will spend a considerable amount of time with that. He either has to concede that there are limits but there haven't been reached. Or he's gonna have to say there are no limits

once he became a political candidate, the Department of Justice and the Judge can't do a darn thing about it. He can say whatever he wants, the Department of Justice and the Judge can't do a darn thing about it. You can say whatever he wants, regardless of its impact on the life and liberty of other people, the justice system. So I think that will ultimately sort out with him, just Donald Trump, not being able to help himself, creating new examples that this appellate court will be able to take

judicial notice of when they reimpose a version or the entire gag order. On the trial date, there's full briefing that she'll handle again on the issue of whether the supremacy clause or any kind of presidential immunity means he can't be tried in the district of Columbia. And when she makes that decision, it'll go to another three judge panel of the DC Court of Appeals. It'll be randomly selected. It won't go to this panel because it's on a different issue. It doesn't arise out of the same issue.

We'll get another panel. It's usually trends heavily Democrat president appointed. And then it'll be the same abusive discretion standard to see whether that was an abusive discretion to apply that or not. So again, deference goes tremendously to the trial judge in making their evaluation. And if they don't like Trump doesn't like either or both of those decisions, as you said, Ben, they'll take it up or try to take it up with an emergency appeal to the US Supreme Court. They have to get through John Roberts first,

because Chief Justice Roberts is the sitting duty judge over the DC Court of Appeals. He's the one has to make the first decision. He may do an administrative stay of some decision, pending full briefing and turning it over to the full court. I doubt he will use the shadow docket to make the decision himself, especially given that it's Donald Trump. And if there's four people that are interested out of the seven maga or six maga that are on the court, then

they're going to get their day in court at the Supreme Court level. Although that doesn't send a tremendous, it doesn't automatically set a chill down by spine because except for Clarence Thomas and Sam Alino, who you can put off to at their own outlier status, most of this Supreme Court at the majority level, even with MAGA, has not supported Donald Trump's worst instincts in impulses about anything. Presidential papers, immunity, the Gen 6 committee, you name it only in very rare

occasions have they sided with Donald Trump and not anything fundamental. So yes, but you're right. The question is whether the March trial date will be jeopardized. He's already done well and we'll get to Canada in a minute with jeopardizing the May trial date because she's already suggested she's going to be moving off in Mar-a-Lago that trial date. If somehow the March date slides and opens, then you've got hopefully awaiting Fawney Willis in Georgia who's waiting to slot her case, and she's not going to be stopped by the US Supreme

Court. Of course, you've got still the books that not yet officially removed, the March trial date for Stormy Daniels against the case by the New Yorker, uh, Manhattan DA, Manhattan DA, right? For the Stormy Daniels hush, hush, hush money business record fraud case. That's still officially on the books as a backup in March. So just like when you and I are trial lawyers and we have backup cases in the same court, Donald Trump has backup cases. He's got a double, he's double booked in March, right, with the trial for Chuck and one right behind it that hasn't yet been officially taken off the calendar in New York. If May slides, you could have Fony Willis slide into that,

but you're right. His number one strategy is to pull the pin on all of these trials so that he could have a clear light of sight to the November election and hopefully win office without having had to sit for a jury either acquitting him or convicting him. That's his whole strategy. It is not let me put forward a defense because I'm innocent. It is not in the New York attorney general case, let me put forward evidence to rebut the accusation that this is a fraudulent enterprise.

It's let's attack the law clerk, let's attack the judge. Let's just try to tear it all down. And fundamentally for me, where I think this legal a.F. show is so important, I don't view that as political things. I don't view it as well because I stand for evidence that that should, it is right now, but that that should be associated with a political party and that, oh, you know, if you're mad, you know, the Maga Republicans, they're just, they hate evidence and they just make up crap.

Like, that's a sad state of our body politic that's something like that exists. And I just approach it as, okay, if you want to put forward your defense, put forward your defense, Donald, if you say what you say, why is it that Mark Meadows took an immunity deal? By the way, Mark Meadows was just sued, and we were doing a hot take on this, and we broke the news at MidasTouch.com. Mark Meadows was sued by his book publisher because everything he said in the book to the public that the election was stolen is a lie where he told special counsel Jack Smith, the exact opposite under oath under penalty a

perjury as part of the immunity deal. Mark Meadows, according to all reports and accounts, which everybody believes to be accurate, including us here at the Midas Dutch Network, Meadows said, no, I told Donald Trump that the election was a free and fair election that bite in one, that he lost. I told him not to do these things. And so Meadows lies to the public, tells the truth under, under, so, so where are, where's your crew that's going in, where's your evidence? Juliani's in vote, you know, is it what was just Juliani going to be your witness? He invokes on some, he just completely lies on others. He doesn't even show up for his case in Washington DC. So he got Terminating sanctions and a default entered and an adverse inference on the issue of punitive damages because Giuliani doesn't even like

Provide document who who who is your crew of people who are giving evidence Actual evidence and that's to me the most critical thing here. One thing I want to say though, where I disagree and a lot of things, special counsel Jack Smith does, the one thing that I really disagree with a month, I understand why he did it, because everything he does is just textbook. I follow the law, here's what it says, this is my position, we're not being creative with the law here.

And the law in federal courts is that there is no video recording of the trials. So I think just to be intellectually consistent, Jack Smith's not going to deviate from what the law is because his whole thing is like whatever the law says, that's what I say it is. And I'm not going to propose something creative here. We're not in the business of you know, of deviating with even if there should be media. So Jack Smith just cited the law. Here's what it is in federal court and we're just here, your honor, what the law is. And Donald Trump who said that he wanted the cameras in there, the first thing that John Laura, by the way, I'm not sure Laura is going to be doing the appeal because I don't think Laura Laura had at that point in time, at least as of a few weeks ago, actually been barred to do the appeal.

He's barred in other states and as a lawyer in other places, but not with the D.C. So we got into the last six. But, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, But Laura said the very first thing we're going to do is demand that this case be televised and they did not demand to be televised They said they take no position. I disagree with Jack Smith there But it's easy for me to make that argument as someone who hosts a Podcast and who hosts and who runs a media network and who does TV shows and that I wanted to but I think it's important that people see TV shows and that I wanted to but I think it's important that people see this testimony even if and I think the federal law is wrong on this we see with judge McAfee in Georgia this can work in an orderly way we the people deserve that transparency but I do understand that Jack Smith just citing the law

right there I want to get your take on the Pope on one final point I'll make though is the same way that you know know, I think with Jack Smith, his view is like, look, if I am not intellectually and legally textbook consistent here, let's take another issue like SEPA, the Classified Information Procedure's Act, where Donald Trump's lawyers consistently tried to argue something that's convenient for them that they want access to potential classified documents in the Washington DC case and I, Jack Smith, am arguing that SEPA clearly says this, will I be losing credibility on future motions if on another motion where it was convenient for me to want the media, I make that argument. Do I lose my gravitas within the court of intellectual consistency?

And that's where I think he's coming from. And so just Judge Chutkin said, when Donald Trump's lawyers wanted to access classified information and the motions and tried to deviate from CEPA section four procedures, I've done so many hot takes on this. I won't be laborate. You probably sick and tired of my CEPA analysis. All the legal efforts out there. But Judge Chukkin was basically like, no, CEPA section for says that these things should be filed without the involvement of the

criminal defense lawyer to avoid what's called graymailing where the criminal defense will get access to sensitive documents that may harm our national security and try to leverage that to get the case dismissed. On the other hand, Judge Cannon completely ignored CPISection for procedures. And Judge Cannon basically said, I'm just going to go by what the CPISection 3 protective order says. I'm going to ignore that there's this section for procedure entirely. So you can make individual motions. You just making Jackson's life more difficult. Thile individual motions for me. I'm giving my own interpretation of what Cepa section four says,

even though I've never done a Cepa case before. And she like does this like tortured statutory interpretation, which in which makes no sense, but we've done that hot take over and over and over again. But my point is intellectual consistency, but I think that's why he did it. Yeah, no, I agree with you. And by the way, watching Canon, you know, trying to make her way through CEPA and all these other complicated issues is like watching a baby in a high chair eating solid food for the first time. I mean, she's just making a mess and it's just giving Jack Smith's team, you know, he's

got a pellet lawyers that actually sit with the trial lawyers on a daily basis to talk about how to set up the record properly for appeal. And he knows he's got an 11 circuit that's just champing at the bit to get something from up from her because they've already slapped her twice. We would she try to interfere with the actual criminal investigation. It seems so long ago of a year ago in August, where there was a raid or an execution of a search warrant on Mar-a-Lago. And she decided to get in the middle of it because he was a former president and she created a whole new class of imaginary precedent that doesn't exist to protect him from a criminal investigation before it was even completed.

So she's got no friends on the 11th Circuit when it comes to how she's been handling the case. And I would love to see all of your seep on knowledge come to fruition of being used at an 11th Circuit of pellet hearing status. I don't know if I disagree with you, but I am comfortable with the reason that federal, the federal court rules, which are, and which have been on the books for a long, long time and Supreme Court precedent going back to the 1960s does not allow federal

court, federal courts trials to be televised. I'm keep going. I'm going back. I'm about to get the Popaki and fans over to my side right now. I know. I know. I know. I'm a child of the OJ Simpson trial.

I think you were in high school. I was a lawyer. I was a lawyer. I was a lawyer. I was a lawyer. I was a middle school. You're a middle school, right? There was a lot of, look, it made a lot of careers. And I get it from a media standpoint. And there's people that you would never have heard of today, like Greta Vance Sestern and aspects of CNN, that you would never have heard of if it wasn't been put on the

map by the OJ trial. And I get it, but it was also a cluster F from the presentation of the case. And there was a lot of mugging for the camera and a lot of inappropriate things, a one out of the courtroom. And it wasn't a it wasn't a brand of justice that I was comfortable with. Now look, I'm a legal commentator. I've been doing this with you for a long time. I would love the content, trust me. And the alternative of having people that get into the courtroom, and then we report the people that are reporting from the courtroom, it's very convoluted.

But it hasn't gotten in the way of us being able to analyze what's happened in real time. If we can get video, we get video, if we get transcripts, we get transcripts, if we get people that are taking really great notes, we get that. And then we're able to do what you and I do, which in with Karen, we do our deep thought analysis, analytics, and like almost like essayists about what we just observed. I get that the raw feed being pumped into people's brains directly. But I just don't think it's a good thing. Knowing Donald Trump is constantly trying

to overthrow not only democracy, but the justice system giving him a ability to do that on national television and whooping up with his followers. I'm not sure that's the dignified justice system for criminal justice that I want to say. But that's me, that's my opinion. But I don't think that there's going to be any way to televised this. I think if both parties agreed, she would have allowed it. But if both parties are not going to agree and now the Department of Justice doesn't agree,

it's not happening. Not happening. So for those of you who's favorite host on legal AF is Michael Popak. I've been like a popak. I want to let you know that I'm here for y'all that that that even though I was in middle school when the OJ Simpson trial let's move let's so let's move to the Southern District of Florida though we

hit on it a little bit where Judge Eileen Cannon is just completely butchering her docket and as I've always said Pope hasn't said, but I'm just saying it, that her corruption is matched by her incompetence. And she almost confuses herself a lot of times too, because she's not running an orderly docket. And the way Donald Trump can't keep all of his lies together, she can keep all of her kind of schemes together and all of her lies together. She can keep all of her kind of schemes together and all of her orders together. I did a hot take once on the fact that she forgot

to even rule on a motion for our media interveners until after the hearing because her docket is just totally and utterly amiss. And she's been doing these paperless orders, which means they're not actually like the way Judge Chutka does these orders that have cases and citations. You have judge can and just do these like minute entries that just show up on the docket. There's really no citations to laws where when a deadline approaches, she'll say minuteless,

paperless docket entry, and then she'll say like, I'm here by staying all deadlines until further notice. And then then that like she did one of those in October 6th, then October 19th. She did one. I want to hold a hearing on November 1st to delay. So she delayed from... So first off, it took her like three months to execute the seep of protective order, which you can't really do anything in a case involving classified information until she signs the protective order. So she drags that out for three months. Then, Jack Smith turns over the documents. Then, Donald Trump winds and says, oh, no, no, we're in September, Judge.

And now we can't make these deadlines. So then she keeps moving all of her deadlines, staying herself. She's like, without even being requested, she's like, staying herself entering these paperless orders. And then she held this hearing on November 1st, without even being requested. She's like staying herself entering these paperless orders and then she held this hearing on November 1st. From this week where she basically said, I've been clined to delay the trial,

but I need to think about it because she never actually makes the order. And then she took a day or two and then she made another minute order, not to actually make the order, but to stay all of the kind of pre-trial motion deadlines that she set, again, pausing her own deadlines. And so what's going on here, though, Popak, you and I have talked about, she's waiting

and there's that there's a unspoken thing taking place here between her and Fulton County District Attorney Fawni Willis, right? And so Judge Cannon wants to keep that May date so that no other cases can go then because she's trying to protect him there, but she also knows that her entire docket is screwed up. And if she moves that to 2024, she's worried because she's trying to help Trump, we both feel, I think, that Fulton County District Attorney Fony Willis is Going to swoop in and go either May or June and ask that to be the trial date. So what Judge Cannon is doing is doing all these like minute Entries of delaying the dates, keeping the trial date. Everybody knows it's in the May trial date. Ain't happening folks. It's done. Not impossible.

They trial date ain't happening folks. It's done, not impossible. Zero percent chance that this thing goes in May, but now Judge Cannon's keeping that as a date just to protect Donald Trump, which I just think makes it extra nefarious. But it's not obvious other than to like people who practice in the federal courts and Jack Smith's like, what's why she's doing that? But that's what's going on with these paperless orders and how it relates to Fulton County District Attorney, Foni Willis.

What do you make of what's going on in the Southern District Fought? You alluded to it before. Yeah, no, I mean, I was a practitioner there regularly. Yeah, it's, you suspected I had a little bit more hope when she set the original date well before November. We still got seven months until May is still a lot of time. Six months, there's a lot of time left on the clock.

Her resolve these issues and still have a trial and a relatively straightforward case. Did sticky finger Donald Trump keep or not keep classified top secret national defense information documents? This is not as we said at the top of the show, nothing involving Donald Trump is a head scratcher or some sort of overly complex fraud or scheme. It is the most infantile and baby stuff you can think of. His fraud in New York is, I don't like the number two, making it a number nine. is I don't like the number two making a number nine. Okay. His fraud, his, his espionage or his obstruction in Florida is physically hiding boxes and using staff to do it and then realizing

there was video of it and then trying to kill the video and all those people around it. That was the, I mean, this is not like the, this is not like the great heist, you know, like, they didn't ever solve the, the, the Lufthansa flight heist, the 1960s into York, who broke it? How did they get all the money and the jewels? This is not that, okay? This case is not what's making it ridiculously overly artificially complex is

Alink County, Alink County, the judge. And so, you know, I think your your prediction that this originally, even before today, that the trial was never going to happen in Miami in this and for look for peer sorry, before the November election is really coming to a fruition. Thank God there are other prosecutors and other courts that are more than ready and willing and able to step in. That's why the Chukkin one was always such an anchor for us because that was March and then everybody else could sort of rotate orbit around it, but still haven't done before November because the good news about democracy

and this justice system is there are prosecutors and judges who believe it's important that Donald Trump get his day in court and either be acquitted or convicted before people have to vote for him in November. You know, and one of the things why I said even when Judge Cannon was the one appointed there, why I was not overly worried about Cannon. And if you go back to what I was saying at that time too, though, and again, I predicted that she was going to engage in all the mischief. So I held those two points together. I said, I wouldn't worry that she was appointed, but she is going to engage in all this mischief. And why I felt confident is the kind of overwhelming evidence that exists throughout the other cases as well. And that ultimately what Judge Kenan is

doing, because her incompetence matches her corruption, will backfire. You know, one of the frustrating things about the wheels of justice moving slowly, is that with each of these moves that Judge Cannon makes to kind of delay, delay, delay, for all of us who want justice, it's infuriating. It absolutely is.

And to see a judge like this who just kind of pokes her finger in our constitutional body and just just continues to engage in this, it is horrible to watch. But ultimately, you've got canon in Florida, but you've got Chutkin who's the exact opposite Thoughtful law and order Detailed doesn't do these paperless orders like does like actual is prompt moves the doc get along and folks We are going there are two cases that are now scheduled for March of 2024 We have Donald Trump testifying next week in the New York Attorney General's Civil Fraud Case.

We have a March trial. We have in the Washington, D.C. federal case. We've got another March trial in the Manhattan District Attorney case. We've got a January trial in the E. Jean Carroll second defamation case, which liabilities already been found. It's how many millions of dollars is the jury going to award, EGEN Carol in that case. We have a lot, we are just at the beginning of all of these cases of accountability as well,

which is why I am very confident, very confident that the wheels of justice will turn in the right direction and Donald Trump will be held accountable. I want to let you know again, I'm very confident in that. And I wouldn't just be saying, oh, I'm confident. No, no, no, I'm kind. We've called all of the moves thus far. I am confident. He will be held accountable. All right, let's go through this disqualification case. Yep. Colorado, Michigan, and Minnesota.

Let's go and reverse order. The Minnesota Supreme Court heard oral argument on a disqualification case there. The Minnesota bench made up of mostly people appointed by Democrats or people who are Democrats on the bench. The Supreme Court there, though, I think they are because of that. They haven't made a ruling yet, but having listened to that oral argument to me, it feels like they are a little bit in their heads about being the ones

who make that decision, taking somebody off a ballot, even if there is the constitutional grounds for disqualification. So I would not be surprised if they come up with some procedural reason to ultimately not rule in favor of allowing the disqualification cases to proceed there. That's just my read of the oral argument there. Michigan's an interesting one where Trump filed a lawsuit to block there is a disqualification action filed in Michigan in September and then Donald Trump just filed an action to try to block seeking injunctive relief in the event that he's ordered removed from the ballot. He's now trying to preempt that with an injunction ordered to remove from the ballot. He's now trying to preempt that with an injunction, lawsuit that he filed in Michigan, trying to have enjoying Jocelyn Benson, the secretary of State there for removing them. And then you've got Colorado in the first week of trials done there.

It was interesting. You had like cash, Patel,el testify who kind of repeated the false information he testified on behalf of Trump. He repeated the false information that Trump was requesting 10,000 National Guard to be there, which we know from Donald Trump's former Secretary of Defense Acting Secretary of Defense Chris Miller. That was false. He was asked that by the January 6th Committee. And so we know that was false. Then you had like Eric Swalwell Congress member testify on behalf of petitioners. You had Ken Buck from Colorado, a Congress member there, testify. And by the way, Ken Buck is, is it reside basically leaving the the Republic of the current Republican Party in Congress? He's not running again saying that the current Republican party has left him just an interesting thing when a member of the Freedom Caucus says that and that they're no longer law in order. But Popoac, I'll

let you kind of wrap it up with the disqualification states in Colorado and across the country. Yeah, I think what we're watching is we're back to court systems struggling with Donald Trump. And now we have various court systems, state houses, state courts, appellate and trial, all struggling with what to do with the 14th Amendment and Article 3 and Donald Trump. And what we're watching is as our founding fathers said it would be, democracy is messy sometimes. Our justice system is messy sometimes. And who gets appointed, who gets elected to these various benches, even if they're democratic appointed like in Minnesota, but Minnesota is sort of oftentimes a little bit of an outlier look at who they've elected to the governorship a couple of times.

I think one time they had a famous wrestler that was their governor. So they, you know, sometimes they take a slightly maverick view of things. Colorado didn't have a problem. The judge in Colorado, Judge Wallace is moving forward efficiently finding that it is exactly what courts are meant to do to interpret the Constitution that it's that the Constitution, the 14th Amendment doesn't say you send it back to Congress when you can't figure out what the language means and And let Congress tell you whether somebody's qualified or disabled from being president or not That's a different branch of government the branch of government that has been charged with determining constitutional issues

Taking the tone from the top at the let's say the US Supreme Court is our courts. That's what they're for. And so Judge Wallace with that approach has run a very efficient trial. I've been shocked by the lack of credible evidence being presented by Donald Trump's side. This is the best he can possibly put on in an attempt to keep himself on the ballot in Colorado. Cash, Patel, an organizer of the rally at Jan 6th, who actually yelled, who's an election denier, saying that everything was peaceful, like she was describing Woodstock. Like it was peaceful and harmony and people were holding hands and I don't know what happened after that.

I mean, you know, to try to point the figure on the violence at other people, 2,000 people stormed the Capitol because Donald Trump told them to. They had one person who testified who's now the Colorado GOP treasurer who actually admitted to being a criminal, to having broken through with the

Capitol, though he didn't go into the Capitol building himself. Note to the FBI, they should pick this guy up when he testified. Tom Jorkeland, BJ, BJURK, L-O-A-L-A-N-D, he said that he thought it was funny, he said that insurrectionists around the world should be insulted because the Republicans aren't really insurrectionists. In other words, they should be embarrassed because they're called insurrectionists. Then instead, the Republicans were just mad about the outcome of the election. That's all that they were doing there, completely trying to downplay all these things. And the reason the buck was there, apparently, was to question the Jan 6th Committee because the foundation of the argument being raised by crew, this group that's prosecuting the

case, if you will, in Colorado, is really the, we're still waiting for the trials that we've talked about. It linked on legal AF. The thing that's done and has a 400 page report that I like to pull out of my library occasionally and wave around on the podcast, oh here's my version, is the Jan 6th Committee and they took all the testimony and all the evidence. And so it is really the Gen 6 Committee report that's found is the basis of reclaiming the Donald Trump, proving that Donald Trump is an insurrectionist and acted and engaged in rebellion. And so Buck was there to say, well, I didn't like that committee

because there weren't any Republicans on it. I mean, the posity of evidence, that was being presented by Donald Trump in a life or death issue about whether he goes on the ballot was just my boggling to me. It was just a motley collection of whoever they could find that would be willing. Where is, and then a whole bunch of constitutional scholars, most of which on the Trump side really didn't seem to really understand how the 14th Amendment works, chief.

And with the judge cross-examined, one of the experts for Donald Trump in Colorado and said, show me a case that you're aware of. We're on a constitutional issue, a court abdicated its responsibility to interpret the constitution and sent it back to Congress to wait for an answer. As you just sat there and he's like, well, I can't think of one. Right. That's Colorado. Then on the other side, Minnesota at the Supreme Court level, they think it's a political

question. You can tell from the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court that you referred to, Ben, that it's a political question. It should be hands off and let Congress decide the issue, not each state. So they're often an entire, they took the bait on by the Trump organ, the Trump people, and this is a political issue only and that Congress should decide the issue.

And even if we could decide the issue, the Chief Judge said, should we? So based on that oral argument, I mean, although there's usually, there's sometimes a mismatch between oral argument and the actual ruling. I don't think so this time. I think the Minnesota Supreme Court's not going to let this go to an evidentiary hearing and is going to try to argue that the Congress needs to do it. And the result is going to be whether it's Minnesota, Michigan and Colorado is

Is going to be how the states approach? There's now obviously going to be a patchwork approach Not every state is going to no surprise here is going to be uniform on how their court system Addresses article the 14th Amendment article three, which means Eventually and maybe not in time for this election. That's the problem. The US Supreme Court is probably going to have to weigh in on this at some point. Problem is we're running at a time on the clock for this election.

And we know what our US Supreme Court and the MAGA right of it, whether you get too close to an election, they just throw up their hands and say sorry, we're too close to the election, we'll have to decide this. This won't impact this election, maybe next Trump next time. So that's my problem. But I think just to leave it on this bed, I think Colorado is she's going to make a ruling that he engaged in insurrection and or rebellion. And she's going to allow the secretary of state

to take him off the ballot. And then we're off, if I'm right, to the Colorado Supreme Court and maybe over to the Supreme. I agree with you. That's exactly what's going to be going down there. And then that principle that you talk about is called the Purcell principle. It's one of these made up Republican kind of principles to justify whatever it is that they want. As I've said before, they kind of come up with these legal frameworks the same way. If you've ever had an argument with a sociopath before, they always go back to just saying things and they can say contradictory things, but they've got their line. So you can't even argue with them. At a group think writ large level,

that's basically the Maga Republican Party. You know, there's strict textualists until you read the text of the Second Amendment, which talks about a well-regulated militia, then they go, yeah, but we don't care about those texts, right? They are states' rights until they want to have national abortion vans, and therefore big government making the decisions

over women's reproductive, over the women's reproductive decisions, then they're no longer for states rights. They're originalists until that doesn't work out for them. They're conservative until they get into power and they want to raise the debt by $8 trillion and have record breaking deficits and print money like crazy. So it's all frameworks.

Then you got the Purcell principle. Oopsies, we are just so close until an election. So we're gonna just have to keep in place the racist, gerrymandered maps. And yeah, we may have gutted the voting rights act of 1965 over the course of the past decade plus. And so now we don't have the pre-clearance requirements. So now the legislatures can do the exact things that the Civil Rights Act of 1965 exactly knew they were going to do and try to prevent. And now we're going to come up with the Purcell Principle,

which basically says, we'll keep the racist map even if we know it violates the law in place until after the election. So what do the state legislatures do? They wait to the very last minute. They basically have the Trump last minute. They basically have the Trump litigation strategy as the legislation strategy now when it comes to their own gerrymandering approach. And so I want to make sure that this is a forum where we where we call it out.

That's the purpose of legal AF2 is we know the framework. We know the game because knowledge is power folks. And when you see what they're doing, you know that it's not evidence-based. It's games, it's propaganda versus evidence, facts, and to me, that's not a political party thing. That's just something that we should aspire to as Americans to want to follow the law, follow the facts, follow the evidence, and taking this episode full circle, not attacking a judge's law clerk. Thank you all so much for watching this episode of Legal AF, as always, it is an honor to spend this time with each

and every one of you. Thank you for making this community so vibrant, so incredible, this unapologetically pro-democracy community. Thank you, thank you, thank you. You want to help support the growth of this platform. You can check us out at patreon.com slash mightestouch P-A-T-R-E-O-N. .com slash mightestouch. We've been breaking some major stories over the past few weeks and months, but definitely

over the past few weeks, you've been seeing the action with Donald Trump and Don Jr. attacking us. So that's P-A-T-R-E-L-N dot com slash, might as touch. We've got new merch, great merch. We've got Jack Smith merch, we've got dark brand and merch. We got some cool stuff. Go to store dot might as touch dot com store dot might as touch dot com. And of course, the classic, classy legal AF gear 100% union made 100% made in the USA.

Thank you everybody for watching. We'll see you next time on legal AF and my cell is Michael Popeaux signing off. Shout out to the Midas Mighty. you